 |
| 
God_Is_Truth
Registered Member
Date Joined Nov 2003
Total Posts : 33
| Posted 3/28/2004 8:10 PM (GMT -6) |   | If God does not know the future as a certainty then how did he know who's sins to put on the cross? he would not even have known who would have been born or what sins would have been committed yet either, so how would he have known which sins to put on Jesus on the cross?
the real question i guess is this: who's sins were put on Jesus on the cross if God did not know who would be born, who would sin and what sins they would commit?
1 Peter 2:24
He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, so that we might die to sins and live for righteousness; by his wounds you have been healed.
looking forward to your responses. thanks in advance. | | Back to Top | | |
 |
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 3/28/2004 8:57 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by God_Is_Truth
If God does not know the future as a certainty then how did he know who's sins to put on the cross? he would not even have known who would have been born or what sins would have been committed yet either, so how would he have known which sins to put on Jesus on the cross?
the real question i guess is this: who's sins were put on Jesus on the cross if God did not know who would be born, who would sin and what sins they would commit?
1 Peter 2:24
He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, so that we might die to sins and live for righteousness; by his wounds you have been healed.
looking forward to your responses. thanks in advance.
There are no scripture passages anywhere which say that Jesus "paid" for our sins on Calvary. The only thing Scripture says that was paid is "a ransom" and "the purchase price of redemption," which anyone can see are quite different from a debt.
Similarly, we say that our soldiers in WWII paid the price of freedom for us all in defeating Hitler. Strictly speaking it is a metaphor, not a literal financial transaction that can be measured by an accountant.
Christ paid the price of FREEDOM from sin's bondage for all who would believe. His death paid for the sins of none, but provided for the salvation of all. Our sins are forgiven as they are repented of and we look in faith to the atoning sacrifice (Jesus' blood) to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. (1 John 1:7,9)
Sincerely,
John
"The Discovery of new truth will modify old views and opinions, and there is perhaps no end to this process with finite minds in any world." Charles G. Finney, Systematic Theology.
revivaltheology.net
| | Back to Top | | |
|
victoryword
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 181
| Posted 3/29/2004 2:23 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by God_Is_Truth
If God does not know the future as a certainty then how did he know who's sins to put on the cross? he would not even have known who would have been born or what sins would have been committed yet either, so how would he have known which sins to put on Jesus on the cross?
the real question i guess is this: who's sins were put on Jesus on the cross if God did not know who would be born, who would sin and what sins they would commit?
1 Peter 2:24
He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, so that we might die to sins and live for righteousness; by his wounds you have been healed.
looking forward to your responses. thanks in advance.
I am not sure why it would require God to know each future born individual and the exact sin that they committed in order for His redemptive work to apply to every individual that will ever be born.
The Bible says that Jesus is the propitiation for the WHOLE WORLD (1 John 2:2). Why would it require Him to kow future generations in order for Him to be their propitiation?
Furthermore, God has stated His desire that ALL MEN be saved (1 Tim. 2:4). Why would it require exhaustive foreknowledge of each individual that is ever born and the sin (or sins) that they would commit in order for God to have this desire? I want all my children and grandchildren to accept Jesus Christ as Savior. I don't know who all my grandchildren will be (I'm still too young to have grandkids) but I know that I desire that they know the Lord and I will ensure that whenever my children have kids I will take some responsibility in helping them to know the Lord as I have done with my own children. Why would God not have the same desire and ensure that the blood covered future generations regardless of His knowledge of them?
The passage you quote says that He bore SIN - PERIOD. So why would it require God to know the specific sin that each person would ever commit in order to bear that sin? Is not the blood of Jesus sufficient to redeeem, cleanse, and remit the sin of every single individual in the world?
Only in systems such as CAlvinism is God required to know each individual that the blood would be sufficient for, because under this system, God's redemptive work limited to an "elect". However, if God's redemptive work is sufficient for every living human being that will walk the face of the earth, and all one needs is exercise faith in this work in order to be saved, then there is no need to have exhaustive foreknowledge of each person and their sin in order for Christ's substitionary work to be effective on their behalf.
If your beliefs cannot be supported by Scripture, they ain't worth supporting
http://www.victoryword.100megspop2.com | | Back to Top | | |
|
God_Is_Truth
Registered Member
Date Joined Nov 2003
Total Posts : 33
| Posted 3/29/2004 12:33 PM (GMT -6) | | so what you guys are saying is that the cross was not about taking each specific sin and putting them on Christ but instead, God's wrath was poured out on Jesus as the price for sins?
thus, because the wages of sin is death, and Jesus died a perfect man and then had God's wrath poured out upon that, he is able to justify all those who put faith in him because in him they also have been killed, had the wrath of God poured out, resurrected and in a sense become a new creation?
or am i totally lost on this? | | Back to Top | | |
|
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 3/29/2004 12:47 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by God_Is_Truth
so what you guys are saying is that the cross was not about taking each specific sin and putting them on Christ but instead, God's wrath was poured out on Jesus as the price for sins?
thus, because the wages of sin is death, and Jesus died a perfect man and then had God's wrath poured out upon that, he is able to justify all those who put faith in him because in him they also have been killed, had the wrath of God poured out, resurrected and in a sense become a new creation?
or am i totally lost on this?
Speaking only for myself, I don't find the penal substitution view (the typical Reformed view) to be founded on Scripture. I find that the Scripture teaches that God's wrath still abides on all who do not believe in Christ in this post-Calvary age (John 3, Romans 1, etc.), and, as the Scripture is also quite clear that Christ died for ALL mankind, it simply cannot be true that God spent ALL his wrath for ALL mankind on Christ. (Or else there could be no divine wrath at all after Calvary, and all would necessarily be saved).
What I do find Scripture to demonstrate is that Christ willingly became a sin-offering for all, making provision for "redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins." Or, as Paul said in Romans 3, "that He (God) might be just, and the justifier of him that hath faith in Jesus."
The Cross of Christ is the means by which God can righteously forgive sin while not mocking His own Law by lessening sin's penalty.
"The Discovery of new truth will modify old views and opinions, and there is perhaps no end to this process with finite minds in any world." Charles G. Finney, Systematic Theology.
revivaltheology.net
| | Back to Top | | |
|
God_Is_Truth
Registered Member
Date Joined Nov 2003
Total Posts : 33
| Posted 3/29/2004 12:53 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by John Earp
Speaking only for myself, I don't find the penal substitution view (the typical Reformed view) to be founded on Scripture. I find that the Scripture teaches that God's wrath still abides on all who do not believe in Christ in this post-Calvary age (John 3, Romans 1, etc.), and, as the Scripture is also quite clear that Christ died for ALL mankind, it simply cannot be true that God spent ALL his wrath for ALL mankind on Christ. (Or else there could be no divine wrath at all after Calvary, and all would necessarily be saved).
What I do find Scripture to demonstrate is that Christ willingly became a sin-offering for all, making provision for "redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins." Or, as Paul said in Romans 3, "that He (God) might be just, and the justifier of him that hath faith in Jesus."
The Cross of Christ is the means by which God can righteously forgive sin while not mocking His own Law by lessening sin's penalty.
that seems to make pretty good sense. i spend a fair amount of time speaking with calvinists and i got this question from them and wasn't sure of how to respond. thanks. | | Back to Top | | |
|
God_Is_Truth
Registered Member
Date Joined Nov 2003
Total Posts : 33
| Posted 3/29/2004 5:38 PM (GMT -6) | | ok, thought about it some more. here is the link i found that question from:
http://www.carm.org/open/questions.htm
it's question #3. i guess the point i'm at now is, what does it mean when peter says "bore our sins" in the verse? | | Back to Top | | |
|
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 3/29/2004 6:50 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by God_Is_Truth
ok, thought about it some more. here is the link i found that question from:
http://www.carm.org/open/questions.htm
it's question #3. i guess the point i'm at now is, what does it mean when peter says "bore our sins" in the verse?
I submit that it can only be a metaphor, because:
1. The OT typologies, of the scapegoat Passover lamb, etc. all involved a symbolic "bearing" of sins.
2. The vast majority of all mankind's sins were not yet in existence at the time that Christ died for them.
Therefore, I submit that Christ's sacrifice for our sins was provisional, as a means by which God could righteously forgive sins, and that these benefits are dispensed incrementally as needed, from the limitless supply of God's grace.
"The Discovery of new truth will modify old views and opinions, and there is perhaps no end to this process with finite minds in any world." Charles G. Finney, Systematic Theology.
revivaltheology.net
| | Back to Top | | |
|
God_Is_Truth
Registered Member
Date Joined Nov 2003
Total Posts : 33
| Posted 3/31/2004 5:16 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by John Earp
quote:
Originally posted by God_Is_Truth
ok, thought about it some more. here is the link i found that question from:
http://www.carm.org/open/questions.htm
it's question #3. i guess the point i'm at now is, what does it mean when peter says "bore our sins" in the verse?
I submit that it can only be a metaphor, because:
1. The OT typologies, of the scapegoat Passover lamb, etc. all involved a symbolic "bearing" of sins.
2. The vast majority of all mankind's sins were not yet in existence at the time that Christ died for them.
Therefore, I submit that Christ's sacrifice for our sins was provisional, as a means by which God could righteously forgive sins, and that these benefits are dispensed incrementally as needed, from the limitless supply of God's grace.
ok, i think i can live with that. thanks. | | Back to Top | | |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 11:30 AM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|